Dotawo: A Journal of Nubian Studies
Volume 1 Article 5
2014
Coordination with goon and Bisyndetic =gon in Dongolawi and Kenzi Proverbs
Marcus Jaeger [email protected]
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.fairfield.edu/djns
Recommended Citation Jaeger, Marcus (2014) "Coordination with goon and Bisyndetic =gon in Dongolawi and Kenzi Proverbs," Dotawo: A Journal of Nubian Studies: Vol. 1 , Article 5. Available at: https://digitalcommons.fairfield.edu/djns/vol1/iss1/5
This item has been accepted for inclusion in DigitalCommons@Fairfield by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Fairfield. It is brought to you by DigitalCommons@Fairfield with permission from the rights- holder(s) and is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/or on the work itself. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Coordination with goon and 93 Bisyndetic =gon in Dongolawi and Kenzi Proverbs
Marcus Jaeger*
1. Introduction
Both Dongolawi1 and Kenzi2 are Nile-Nubian languages, belong- ing to the Nubian language family. Along with Tama, Nyima, Nara, and the extinct Meroitic language, Nubian represents the Northern branch of the Eastern Sudanic language group.3 This group is ulti- mately part of the Nilo-Saharan language phylum. The Dongolawi language area is situated around the town of Dongola in Northern Sudan, the Kenzi language around Aswan and Kom Ombo, both in southern Egypt. In spite of being 800 km apart from each other, the Dongolawi and Kenzi languages show signifi- cant similarities to each other in all linguistic aspects. There are
* My British friends Geoffrey Sutton and Derek Cheeseman improved the English grammar and spelling of the paper. Dr Angelika Jakobi read different versions of the paper and commented on them in her usual very detailed way. Prof Ahmed Sokarno Abdel-Hafiz discussed some aspects of goon with me. He impresses me by staying and working in his Nubian village environment which occurs rarely among Nubian scholars. Most of the thanks for this research belongs to the Kenzi and Dongolawi Nubians who sat with me for endless hours, inviting me for lots of cups of tea (and coffee and karkade and meals and…), teaching me their language, patiently answering my questions and making me feel at home with them. Among them I want to mention especially the Dongolawi El-Shafie El-Guzuuli from Khannaag. Some of the time writing the article I stayed with him using the opportunity to ask many questions, getting honest answers. Muhammad Hassan from Tura’ explained many of Hāmid Khabīr AlShaich’s collected proverbs. Among the Kenuzi ‘Abdel- Rahman ‘Awwad and Khālid ‘Awwad from Siyaala, Fathi ‘Abdel-Sayid from Dakka and Thābit Zāki Mukhtar from Ombarkaab were especially helpful. 1 ‘Dongolawi’ is a term used by outsiders. The speakers call their language ‘Andaandi’ (meaning ‘which belongs to us’) but do not give a specific name to themselves. ‘Oshkir’ is another outsider term applied by Nobiin speakers. I use the term ‘Dongolawi’ as in other academic papers. 2 ‘Kenuzi’ as an ethnic group and ‘Kenzi’ as a language name are also terms used by outsiders. The people call their language and their ethnic group ‘Mattokki’ (with different interpretations of the term). In order to stay consistent with the term ‘Dongolawi’ I use the terms ‘Kenuzi’ for the speakers and ‘Kenzi’ for the language. 3 Rilly, “The Linguistic Position of Meroitic.”
Jaeger, Marcus. “Coordination with goon and Bisyndetic =gon in Dongolawi and Kenzi Proverbs.” Dotawo 1 (2014): pp. 93–120. Jaeger
different theories about the reason for that closeness depending on historical assumptions. The early development in classification of the Nile Nubian lan- guages is summarized by Herzog:
94 Die vor 1879 gedruckten Abhandlungen schwanken ausnahmslos nur zwischen zwei oder drei Gruppen, je nachdem, ob der Author die Kenuzi und Danagla als Einheit betrachtete.4
In the 20th century due to the similarities between the two languag- es most Western scholars and their publications regard Dongolawi and Kenzi as one single language.5 The latest edition of the Ethnologue regards Dongolawi and Kenzi as separate languages, for sociolinguistic reasons.6 Many speakers of Dongolawi and Kenzi believe that they speak different languages7 although they also realize that their languages are closely related. In the following I distinguish between Dongolawi and Kenzi providing evidence of some linguistic differences between both languages. The most important study on the Dongolawi Nubian language in the 20th century is the grammar by Armbruster8 with other gram- mars written earlier. On Kenzi Nubian spoken in southern Egypt in the 20th century there are grammatical studies by Massenbach and the Kenzi mother-tongue speaker Abdel-Hafiz.9 This paper looks at coordination10 with goon and bisyndetic =gon11 in the context of adversative and contrast marking in both Dongo- lawi and Kenzi.
4 Herzog, Die Nubier, p. 24. Translated: “Studies published before 1879 vacillated without exception between only two or three [language] groups, depending on whether the writer regarded the Kenuzi and Danagla as a single entity.” The third language group Herzog talks about are the Nobiin. 5 Cf. Werner, Grammatik des Nobiin, p. 15; Bechhaus-Gerst, Sprachwandel durch Sprachkontakt am Beispiel des Nubischen im Niltal, p. 19; Bender, “Nilo-Saharan,” p. 45, and editions of the Ethnologue earlier than the 17th edition. The Ethnologue is a reference guide to all known languages of the world. During my travels I have never heard ‘Dongola’ used as a language name by any speakers of the language. Dongola plainly is the name of the most important town in the Dongola reach with Old Dongola being the capital of former Old Nubia and modern day Dongola be- ing the seat of the present governorate. 6 Lewis et al, Ethnologue. Paul Lewis, p.c.: ‘This is the first edition of the Ethnologue where Dongolawi is named ‘Andaandi.’” 7 A common exclamation among Kenuzi when listening to Dongolawi is: “That sounds like Fadidja Nubian.” Fadidja Nubian is the other Egyptian Nile Nubian language. 8 Armbruster, Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar, based on data collected in the 1910s 9 Massenbach, Wörterbuch des nubischen Kunuzi-Dialektes; Abdel-Hafiz, A Reference Grammar of Kunuz Nubian. Abdel-Hafiz continues publishing topics relating to the Egyptian Nile- Nubian languages unfortunately mainly in journals with limited availability, cf. Abdel- Hafiz, “Nubian Relative Clauses.” His most recent publication is Abdel-Hafiz, “Coordinate Constructions in Fadicca and English.” 10 Haspelmath, Coordinating Constructions, p. 4: “A coordinating construction consists of two or more coordinands.” 11 In our case =gon occurring once in each of the two coordinands. Coordination with goon and Bisyndetic =gon
Besides conjunction and disjunction adversative coordination is one of the main types of coordination. Crystal definesadversative as follows:
In grammar and semantics, a form of construction which ex- presses an antithetical circumstance. Adversative meaning can be 95 expressed in several grammatical ways (as ‘adversatives’), such as through a conjunction (but), adverbial (however, nevertheless, yet, in spite of that, on the other hand), or preposition (despite, except, apart from, notwithstanding).12
Crystal’s definition is restricted to the English language. Other schol- ars look at the notion of adversativity from a typological perspective and suggest more refined terms and concepts of adversativity. Both, Malchukov and Haspelmath13 begin with a general definition describing adversative coordination simply as ‘but’-coordination. Haspelmath considers the term concessive and its conceptual proximity to adversative: “In English, […] concessive clauses with ‘although’ are often roughly equivalent to ‘but’ coordinations.”14 That corresponds with Malchukov’s observation: “Many authors use the terms concessive and adversative interchangeably to refer to the function of denial of expectations,”15 adding later “that the ad- versative meaning is more general than the concessive.”16 A paraphrase of adversativity is presented by Zeevat: “The con- tent has been suggested to be false in the context.”17 exemplified by German ‘doch.’ I.e. adversativity challenges a previous assumption, corresponding to Malchukov’s ‘concessive.’ Further terms used to describe the concessive are “frustration”18 and “countering.”19 In the following I use ‘adversative’ in a general meaning with ‘concessive’ in a restricted notion, as Malchukov above. A further category is contrast denoting “The new content ad- dresses the old topic with its polarity inverted.”20 Malchukov21 em- phasises the many similarities and few differences between the two propositions which make up the contrast. The contrast itself is es- tablished between one or more of the differences.
12 Crystal, A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics, p. 14. 13 Malchukov, “Towards a Semantic Typology of Adversative and Contrast Marking,” p. 179. Haspelmath, “Coordination,” p. 2. 14 Haspelmath, “Coordination,” p. 28 15 Malchukov, “Towards a Semantic Typology of Adversative and Contrast Marking,” p. 179. 16 Ibid., p. 180. 17 Zeevat, “Particles,” p. 100. 18 Longacre, “Sentences as combination of clauses,” p. 385. 19 Levinsohn, Self-Instruction Materials on Narrative Discourse Analysis, p. 91. 20 Zeevat, “Particles,” p. 100. 21 Malchukov, “Towards a Semantic Typology of Adversative and Contrast Marking,” p. 183. Jaeger
Sometimes the term ‘contrast’ is used in a wider sense similar to the adversative in its general definition.22 In order to distinguish between ‘contrast’ in its general and its specific meaning Malchu- kov also speaks of “semantic opposition”23 and Levinsohn of “proto typical contrast.”24 96 I use ‘contrast’ in its specific meaning. One way to test for specific ‘contrast’ in the English meta-language is to add ‘in contrast’ to the second coordinand. Further categories of adversativity are ▶▶ ‘mirative’ dealing with new, unexpected, surprising, yet not nec- essarily unintentional information.25 A good way for testing is to add the word ‘suddenly.’ It is related to the concessive and until recently not distinguished from it; ▶▶ ‘restrictive’ meaning “[…] the second conjunct refutes the in- ference that the event referred to in the first conjunct has been (completely and successfully) realized.”26 For Longacre27 ‘restric- tive’ and ‘contrastive’ belong together, as indeed sometimes only the context makes a statement ‘restrictive’ or ‘contrastive’; ▶▶ ‘correction’ meaning “the content was denied in the common ground”28; or defined as “not x, but y.”29 Correction eliminates an assumption which usually is not made explicit.30
As specific data regarding mirative, restrictive and correction are limited, in the following I do not include it. That takes me closer to Horn31 whose work on negation dates earlier than the other refer- enced works on adversativity and shows more limited differentia- tion, like regarding correction as part of the concessive. That leaves two kinds of adversativity I deal with: ▶▶ concessive32 / denial of expectation; ▶▶ contrastive33 / semantic opposition.
22 Cf. Blakemore, Relevance and Linguistic Meaning, p. 54: ‘… it [‘but’] encodes the information that there is some kind of contrast. The problem is that the nature of the contrastive relation seems to vary across contexts.’ 23 Malchukov, “Towards a Semantic Typology of Adversative and Contrast Marking,” p. 183. 24 Levinsohn, Self-Instruction Materials on Narrative Discourse Analysis, p. 92. 25 Malchukov, “Towards a Semantic Typology of Adversative and Contrast Marking,” p. 187, based on DeLancy. 26 Ibid., p. 180. 27 Longacre, “Sentences as combination of clauses,” p. 378. 28 Zeevat, “Particles,” p. 100. 29 Malchukov, “Towards a Semantic Typology of Adversative and Contrast Marking,” p. 192. 30 Horn, A Natural History of Negation, p. 404. 31 Ibid., pp. 404, 409. 32 As used by Malchukov, “Towards a Semantic Typology of Adversative and Contrast Marking,” p. 179. I do not employ the term ‘adversative’ in order to avoid misunderstanding. An English example sentence is: ‘Although I like Beethoven, my daughter does not enjoy any classical music.’ (I.e. I had expected that my daughter would like at least some classical music.) 33 An English example sentence is: ‘While I like Beethoven, you like the Beatles.’ Coordination with goon and Bisyndetic =gon
By looking at only two kinds of adversativity I have to rely less on context and intuition which varies across contexts.34 In concessive and contrastive sentences there are two coordi- nands (coordinate clauses) which are coordinated by a marker35 (in the English meta-language ‘but,’ ‘although,’ ‘however,’ ‘while’). With changed intonation English concessive and contrastive sentences 97 can be uttered without a marker, too. While not excluding, Zeevat and Malchukov do not specifically include the discourse level. Whereas with most proverb collections proverbs are written down in isolation they belong to an oral dis- course which needs to be taken into consideration. For adversativity in the sense of ‘adversative passive’ and ‘mal- efactivity’ which “expresses an event that happens to the detriment of the subject argument” I refer to Payne.36 The adversative markers discussed in this paper will be ‘mono- syndetic’ (occurring once) or ‘bisyndetic’ (occurring twice). If sub-/ coordinators are omitted one speaks of ‘asyndetic’ coordination which is “especially [used] in order to achieve an economical or dra- matic form of expression.”37 As proverbs are economical, asyndetic coordination is to be expected wherever possible. Another reason for the existence of asyndetic coordination is pro- vided by Levinsohn, speaking of a ‘connective’ instead of a marker:
If two propositions are in a countering relation, many languages do not mark the relation between them by means of a connective un- less other conditions are fulfilled.38
In the above mentioned Nubian grammars39 the term ‘adversative’ or any other related terms do not occur. In Armbruster40 a Dongolawi coordinator expressing ‘but, on the contrary’ is listed under the heading ‘The Infixed Conjunction.’ Un-
34 Intuition in the related field of contrast and (non-)truth conditional meaning is discussed in Blakemore, Relevance and Linguistic Meaning, p. 37. 35 In this paper ‘marker’ means an explicate coordinator and subordinator. Haspel math, “Coordination,” and others prefer the term ‘coordinator’ to ‘marker.’ However as its derivation ‘coordination’ includes constructions without a marker, I apply the term ‘coordinator’ when this paper branches out to adversative coordination without markers. – In the beginning ‘coordination’ includes subordination. The distinction between a coordinative and subordinate function in Dongolawi and Kenzi is developed step by step. A general definition of coordination is found in Crystal, A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics, p. 110: “A term in grammatical analysis to refer to the process or result of linking linguistic units which are usually of equivalent syntactic status […].” 36 Payne, Describing Morphosyntax, p. 208. See also Tsuboi, “Malefactivity in Japanese.” 37 Crystal, A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics, p. 450. For the definitions of these terms see also Haspelmath, Coordinating Constructions. 38 Levinsohn, Self-Instruction Materials on Non-Narrative Discourse Analysis, p. 29. 39 Armbruster, Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar; Massenbach, Wörterbuch des nubischen Kunuzi- Dialektes; and Abdel-Hafiz, A Reference Grammar of Kunuz Nubian. 40 Armbruster, Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar, §§ 4484, 6093. Jaeger
der the heading ‘The Single Positive Verb-Concretion’41 one finds a few clauses with adversative meaning without discussing their ad- versativity. In the chapter ‘Co-ordinate Sentences’42 there is no men- tioning of any coordination I call adversative. When looking at Kenzi grammatical structures representing 98 German ‘obgleich’ (‘although’) Massenbach begins with the remark “Eigentümlicher Gebrauch.”43 She leaves it with two example sen- tences and one grammatical comment. Abdel-Hafiz talks about ‘concession’ as part of ‘Adverb Clauses.’44 Just a little bit more detailed than Massenbach there are three ex- ample sentences and some short explanations. In another publication Abdel-Hafiz looks at “Coordinate Con- structions in Fadicca and English” with Fadicca or Fadidja being a Nile-Nubian language. A third of a page is dedicated to “adversative coordination”45 introducing Fadidja tan as “coordinator” of “a con- cession subordinate clause.”46 In one example sentence tan is inter- preted as suffix, in another one as separate word. No other function of tan is introduced. The paper does not research whether there are Fadidja “concession subordinate clauses” without tan. The same paper also talks about “contrastive coordination”47 meaning disjunction and not including the propositional level.48 Adversative and related coordinate constructions analyzed in this paper are taken from Dongolawi and Kenzi proverbial data col- lected from 2009 onwards. Currently the corpus consists of about 225 Dongolawi proverbs49 and a similar number from Kenzi with goon and bisyndetic =gon occurring regularly.50 In the following Dongolawi proverbs will be marked by dp and a running number; Kenzi proverbs by kp and a running number.
41 Ibid., §§ 5731–7. 42 Ibid., §§ 6237–44. 43 Massenbach, Wörterbuch des nubischen Kunuzi-Dialektes, p. 136 §21C7. Translated: ‘strange usage.’ 44 Abdel-Hafiz, A Reference Grammar of Kunuz Nubian, p. 269. 45 Abdel-Hafiz, “Coordinate Constructions in Fadicca and English,” p. 6. 46 Cf. ibid., I name the marker of a subordinate clause ‘subordinator.’ 47 Ibid., pp. 7, 8. 48 Adversativity is not included in Werner’s Grammatik des Nobiin. 49 In this paper I do not distinguish between proverbs and wise sayings. 50 Except for a proverb collection by a Dongolawi from Xannaag village (Hāmid Khabīr about 125 proverbs) and another much smaller one from ;حكم و امثال نوبية من دنقال ,AlShaich a Dongolawi from Magaasir Island (Taha A. Taha, “Proverbs in a threatened Language Variety in Africa”; about 10 proverbs) no published material was used. Some Nubians (the Dongolawi El-Shafie El-Guzuuli also from Xannaag village, the Fadidja Maher Habboob and the Kenzi Mekki Muhammad from Maharaqa village) presented their own hand- written collections of proverbs to me. All these proverbs were checked and discussed with Dongolawi and Kenzi mother tongue speakers especially in order to discover their meanings and write them down according to orthographical rules (based on El-Guzuuli & Jaeger, “Aspects of Dongolawi Roots and Affixes” and Jaeger & Hissein “Aspects of Kenzi- Dongolawi Phonology Related to Orthography”) leading the co-investigators to remember further proverbs. Coordination with goon and Bisyndetic =gon
Finnegan observes some difference between proverbs and day- to-day speech:
[…] it is clear that some sort of heightened speech, in one form or another, is commonly used in proverbs: and that this serves to set them apart from ordinary speech.51 99
In our case where Dongolawi and Kenzi exhibit a strong Arabic in- fluence, proverbs being more conservative may enable us to recog- nize certain Nubian grammatical features more clearly. Therefore keeping in mind that proverbs ▶▶ represent non-narrative text; ▶▶ employ a restricted amount of grammar only; ▶▶ have a tendency to be more conservative linguistically, proverbs still provide a beneficial starting point of investigation into linguistic analyses and especially into adversativity. Proverbs contradict, challenge, convince, correct, and eliminate existing as- sumptions. Proverbs with ‘but’ coordinator point to a wider argu- mentative discourse as described by Reagan when discussing Shona proverbs: “The free use of tsumo [Shona proverbs] is the accepted way of winning an argument.”52 Therefore it is expected to encounter adversative coordinat- ing among proverbs at least as frequently as among average narrative texts. The next section reviews insights into adversativity from non- English / non-Nubian languages of different language phyla. After- wards I deal with clauses coordinated by goon and bisyndetic =gon, followed by clauses without any marker, i.e. ‘juxtaposed clauses’ and a summary. That allows some insight into the use and non-use of these two coordinators. Where available, results from proverbial data are compared with narrative texts.53
2. Adversative in non-Nubian languages
In the Nile-Nubian languages any reference related to adversativity is sparse, as König laments in general:
Any attempt to give a cross-linguistic characterization of concessive relations and the way they are expressed in the world’s languages is constrained by the fact that we do not have enough relevant information from a representative sample of languages. … Conces-
51 Finnegan, Oral Literature in Africa, p. 403. 52 Reagan, Non-Western Educational Traditions, p. 64. 53 Taken from Massenbach, Nubische Texte im Dialekt der Kunūzi und der Dongolawi. Jaeger
sive relations have always aroused less interest than conditional or causal ones.54
Fortunately since 1988 research into adversative and related co- ordination in languages besides English has been increased 100 and published.55 While working on non-Indo-European languages the termi- nology for adversative functions has been refined from former- ly two (concessive and contrastive) to the ones described in the preceding section. Kibrik worked on the Upper Kuskokwim Athabaskan language in interior Alaska, belonging to the Eyak-Athabaskan language phylum. Its main adversative marker ˀedinh56 “tends to appear at the clause boundary, but in terms of intonation it may belong ei- ther to the first [placed at the end] or to the second clause [placed at the beginning].”57 Malchukov starts with Russian which has different markers for denial-of-expectation and semantic opposition, while semantic opposition and additive have the same marker, using Malchukov’s terminology. Further language material is presented from Altaic- Tungusic languages from Eastern Russia: ▶▶ Manchu has different markers for the (non-adversative) additive and adversative (concessive), with contrast unmarked. ▶▶ Even uses the same marker for the whole spectrum of additive, contrastive and adversative.
The opposite of Even is Koryak (far Eastern Russia), a Chukotko- Kamchatkan / Paleosiberian language where different markers are used for the additive (non-adversative), the contrastive and the adversative. Longacre worked on Ibaloi (Philippines), belonging to the Aus- tronesian language phylum,58 and on Wojokeso59 (alternatively Safeyoka, Papua New Guinea) belonging to the Trans-New Guinean language phylum. Regarding Ibaloi he writes:
54 König, “Concessive connectives and concessive sentences,” p. 145. 55 Kibrik, “Coordination in Upper Kuskokwim Athabaskan”; Malchukov, “Towards a Semantic Typology of Adversative and Contrast Marking”; Haspelmath, “Coordination”; Longacre, “Sentences as Combination of Clauses”; Levinsohn, Self-Instruction Materials on Narrative Discourse Analysis; and Ibid., Self-Instruction Materials on Non-Narrative Discourse Analysis. While Longacre, “Sentences as Combination of Clauses” does not speak explicitly about adversative, he deals “with underlying but relations. […] the notion of contrast requires paired lexical oppositions” (p. 378). 56 Kibrik, “Coordination in Upper Kuskokwim Athabaskan” glosses it as ‘but.’ 57 Ibid., p. 549. 58 Language examples: Longacre, “Sentences as combination of clauses,” pp. 390, 392. 59 Language examples: Ibid., p. 409. Coordination with goon and Bisyndetic =gon
The most characteristic conjunction in the Ibaloi antithetical sentence is nem ‘but.’ A further conjunction jey ‘while, but’ is also used here, and there is occasional absence of conjunction (juxtaposition).60
The coordinator nem occurs at the beginning of the second co- 101 ordinate clause. In the example sentences it marks contrast yet not concessive. Levinsohn illustrates the ‘countering connective’61 through lan- guage examples from the Niger-Congo language phylum. He ex- emplifies adversativity on discourse level by the marker ka from Lobala (Democratic Republic of Congo).62 ka is a marker of ‘counter evidence’ indicating “a backward countering relation between two utterances,”63 occurring in narrative discourse:
ka always occurs in sentence-initial position. It never occurs midsentence between two clauses. As a result it never functions as a straight contrast marker. […] ka commonly introduces narrator comment into the flow of action.64
Its effect is that the hearer is constrained “to access two optimally relevant assumptions that counter each other.”65 Some of the above references describe where within the same function adversative markers are employed and where not. I.e. some adversative sentences are juxtaposed, others not, depending on the context. As Levinsohn observed in Kalinga (Philippines, Austrone- sian language phylum), the marker yakon “but […] is not used in hor- tatory texts” and “in narratives […] is used only when the counter- ing proposition is important or relevant to what follows.”66 Even more complex rules of adversative marking are found in Bariai (Papua New Guinea, Austronesian language phylum) and Dungra Bhil (India, Indo-European language phylum).67 Contrastive coordination does not necessarily occur through special markers. It also employs syntactic devises. In Mono (Dem-
60 Ibid., p. 390. 61 In Levinsohn, Self-Instruction Materials on Narrative Discourse Analysis. His ‘countering connective’ corresponds to the concessive. 62 Ibid., p. 92, based on data from Morgan, “Semantic Constraints on Relevance in Lobala Discourse.” 63 Morgan, “Semantic Constraints on Relevance in Lobala Discourse,” pp. 125, 137. 64 Ibid., p. 138. 65 Ibid., p. 125. 66 Both quotes from Levinsohn, Self-Instruction Materials on Non-Narrative Discourse Analysis, p. 30. 67 Both in ibid., 31. Jaeger
ocratic Republic of Congo) the ‘prototypical contrast’ is achieved through left-dislocation.68
3. Clauses coordinated with goon
102 Two markers used for coordinating or subordinating Dongolawi and Kenzi proverbs consisting of at least two propositions are goon and =gon. Non-proverbial Dongolawi sentences with goon are69:
duulen goon, meedigi unyurmun. – Although he is old, he knows noth- ing.
nog buun goon, elkori. – While walking, I found it.
In Kenzi one hears:
oddin goon, jellir juusu. – Although he was ill, he went to work.
boodbuun goon, digirsu. – While running, he fell down.
goon ends the first of two coordinated clauses. The same marker is used for adversative and non-adversative coordination. In the first example goon denotes concessive (rendered as ‘although’), in the sec- ond non-adversative temporal simultaneity (rendered as ‘while’). While Massenbach’s and Abdel-Hafiz’s Kenzi grammars gloss goon as one morpheme, Armbruster70 interprets it as two suffixes: The object marker71 followed by ‑on. Armbruster writes gi+on as gon with short vowel. In Dongolawi conversation I hear both, long72 and short vowel. Altogether the vowel-length is difficult to determine as in spoken Dongolawi the final on (if long vowel) or final n (if short vowel) is dropped frequently. In Kenzi when pronounced properly, there is always a long vowel however the final on is dropped even more regularly than in Dongolawi leading Abdel-Hafiz to write go.73 As Kenzi always has long vowel and Dongolawi varies between long and short vowel I standardize and write goon in both.
68 Levinsohn, Self-Instruction Materials on Narrative Discourse Analysis, p. 92. His ‘prototypical contrast’ corresponds to the contrastive. 69 Dongolawi example sentences are provided by El-Shafie El-Guzuuli, p.c., also the following example sentences marked by ds. Kenzi example sentences from Abdel-Hafiz, p.c. 70 Armbruster, Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar, §5731, and ibid., Dongolese Nubian: A Lexicon, p. 162. 71 While otherwise I interpret =gi as accusative suffix when discussing Armbruster’s writings I employ his terminology (e.g. object). – Armbruster divides other suffixes beginning with g similarly, e.g., for him =ged also begins with an object marker followed by -ed. 72 As among speakers from Khannaag. 73 Abdel-Hafiz, A Reference Grammar of Kunuz Nubian, pp. 267, 269. Coordination with goon and Bisyndetic =gon
In the following I distinguish the polarity of coordinated clauses; i.e. whether a proposition is in the affirmative or in the negative; ‘af- firmative’ defined as ‘type of sentence or verb which has no marker of negation’74 or ‘absence of negation’75 and ‘negative’ being the op- posite, resulting in at least four cases of polarity. I am aware that that distinction may not be sufficient: 103
Perhaps we simply need better criteria for distinguishing denials of truth from assertions of falsity.76
Additionally I distinguish whether the subject remains or changes.
3.1 Affirmative–affirmative propositional order with same subject77
ⲅⲁ̄ⲗⲟⲛ ⲁⲧⲧⲓⲣ ⲃⲟ̅ⲩ̅ⲛ ⲅⲟ̄ⲛ, ⲉⲥⲥⲓⲛ ⲉ̄ⲣⲅⲉⲇ ⲇⲓ̄ⲛ. dp1 gaalon attir buun goon, essin eerked diin.
gaalo=n attir buu-n goon jar=gen near stat-2sg sub essi=n eer=ged dii-n water=gen desire=ins die-2sg “Although you are near the [water] jar, you die from thirst.”
粩ⲣⲕⲉⲇ ⲃⲟ̅ⲩ̅ⲛ ⲅⲟ̄ⲛ, 粩ⲥ粩ⲇⲕⲉⲇ ⲓⲙⲃⲉⲗⲓⲛ. dp2 urked buun goon, usudked imbelin.
ur=ged buu-n goon head=ins stat-3sg sub usud=ged imbel-in anus=ins stand.up-3sg “Although he rests with the head, he stands up with the anus.”
74 Crystal, A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics, p. 15. 75 Horn, A Natural History of Negation, p. 32. While this definition is very short on p. 30 he goes into more detail about contrasting affirmative and negative: “[…] the closest equivalent of the negative proposition within this system is predicate denial, in which a predicate […] is denied of a subject s.” 76 Ibid., p. 399. An alternative way would have been to distinguish between adversative coordinated clauses occuring simultaneously and occurring one after the other. However a quick run-through showed that results would show less consistency. 77 There are no example sentences where the subject is stated explicitly. Abbreviations used in the analysis of the proverbs are based on the Leipzig glossing rules: 1, 2, 3 – 1st, 2nd, 3rd person; acc – accusative; all2 – allative with =gir; caus – causative; cond – conditional; conj – conjunction; coord – coordinator; cop – copula; def – definite; dur – durative; fut – future; gen – genitive; imp – imperative; ins – instrumental; int – intensifier; loc – locative; neg – negation; neut – marker of the so-called present tense; nr – nominalizer; pass – passive; pcpt – participle; poss – possessive; prt1 – preterite with -ko(o); prt2 – preterite with -s; pl – plural; pst – with participles, the so-called past tense; rept – repetitive; sg – singular; stat – stative; sub – subordinator; subj - subject. Jaeger
kp1 ⲧⲓⲛⲅⲁ̄ⲣⲣⲟ ⲧⲉ̄ⲃⲓⲛ ⲅⲟ̄ⲛ, ⲙⲁⲗⲧⲓⲣⲛⲁ ϩⲁⲃⲁⲣⲕⲉⲇ ⲁ̄ ⲓⲥⲥⲓⲅⲓ. tingaarro teebin goon, maltirna habarked aa issigi.
tingaar=ro teeb-in goon west=loc stop-3sg sub 104 malti=ro=na habar=ged aag issig-i east=loc=gen news=ins dur ask-3sg “Although he stops at the west [bank], he asks for the news of the east [bank].”
kp2 eddigi aa nallan goon, tenna ettirgi aa tigra. “Although they see the hyena, they trace its footprint.”
3.2 Affirmative–negative propositional order with different subject
ds478 ⲃⲉⲣⲧⲓ ⲇⲓⳝⲓ ⲕⲟ̄ⲗ ⲅⲟ̄ⲛ, ⲧⲉⲛⲛ ⲃⲓⲧⲁ̄ⲛⲓ ⲕⲁⲗⲅⲓ ⲉⲗⲙ粩ⲛⲁⲛ. berti diji kool goon, tenn bitaani kalgi elmunan.
berti dij=i kool goon goat five=pl having sub tenn bitaan=i kal=gi el-mun-an 3sg.poss child=pl food=acc find-neg-3pl “Although he owns five goats, his children donot find enough to eat.”
kp4 ⲧⲉⲣ ⲃⲉ̄ⲣⲃⲟ̅ⲩ̅ⲛ ⲅⲟ̄ⲛ, ⲧⲉⲛⲛⲁ ⲓ̄ ⲉⲥⲥⲓⲅⲓ ⲁ̄ ⲛⲁⲕⲕⲓⲙⲛ粩 ter beerbuun goon, tenna ii essigi aa nakkimnu.
ter beer-buu-n goon 3sg.subj satisfied-stat-3sg sub tenna ii essi=gi aag nakki-munu 3sg.poss hand water=acc dur drip-neg “Although he is satisfied, his hand doesnot drip water.”
3.3 Negative–affirmative propositional order with same subject
dp5 ϩⲁⲛ粩ⲅⲓ ⳝⲁ̄ⲛⲙⲉⲛ ⲅⲟ̄ⲛ, ⲕⲟⳝⲓⲣⲅⲓ ⲕⲟⲕⲕⲓⲛ. hanugi jaanmen goon, kojirki kokkin.
hanu=gi jaan-men goon donkey=acc buy-neg sub
78 While here goon is optional it is necessary in the following Kenzi proverb. Coordination with goon and Bisyndetic =gon
kojir=gi kokki-n peg=acc knock-3sg “Although he has not bought a donkey, he hammers a peg.”79
ⲕⲁⲙⲅⲓ ⳝⲁ̄ⲛ ⲙⲉ̄ⲛⲓⲛ ⲅⲟ̄ⲛ, ⲓⲣⲣⲓⲅⲓ ⲁ̄ ⳝⲁ̄ⲛⲥ粩. kp5 kamgi jaan80 meenin goon, irrigi aa jaansu. 105
kam=gi jaan meen-in goon camel=acc buy be.not-3sg sub irri=gi aag jaan-s-u rope=acc dur buy-prt2-3sg “Although he had not bought a camel, he bought a bridle.”
hanugi egir meenin goon, ossigi aa walagi. kp6 “Although he does not ride the donkey, he shakes the leg.”
tii jaan meenin goon, irrigi aa kaashra. kp7 “Although they do not buy a cow, they search for the rope.”
ϣⲓⲃⲓⲗⲗⲉ ⲟ̅ⲩ̅ⲱⲉ ⲙⲉ̄ⲛⲓⲛ ⲅⲟ̄ⲛ, ⲁⲣⲓ̄ⲥ ⲇⲁ̄ⳝⲓⲛ ⲁⲇⲉⲙⲓⲅⲓ ⲁ̄ⲅ ⲟⲅⲓⳝⲣⲓⲛ. ms:k281 shibille ūwemēningon, arīs dājin ademig āgogjirin.
shibille uuwe meen-in goon kite call be.not-3sg sub ariis daaji-n adem=i=gi aag groom roam-3sg man=pl=acc dur ogij-r-in invite-neut-3sg “Although he did not call the kite, he roamed around inviting the men.”
With some of the above proverbs the subject remains (or is related), the verbs and possible accusatives are related to each other with at least one item being contrasted using the proverbial stylistic fea- tures of parallelism through synonyms and antonyms. That speaks in favour of contrastive coordination. In my rendering I have de- cided for concessive coordination, with the assumption being chal- lenged not made explicit, as that is nearer my co-investigators’ ren-
79 A wooden (sometimes metal) peg is hammered into the ground in order to tether the donkey. 80 One Kenzi speaker said jaanin, conjugating the first verb, too. However, I stick with the standard form. 81 Taken from a narrative text in Massenbach, Nubische Texte im Dialekt der Kunūzi und der Dongolawi, p. 22. For the example sentences I use Massenbach’s orthography. In the current orthography the second word would be uuwe meenin goon. Jaeger
dering. In all the above Dongolawi proverbs goon is not optional, it is required.82 In the Kenzi proverbs goon occurs negated as meenin goon83 in the same position as goon (i.e. at the end of the first clause) and with the preceding verb in the neutral tense like in a serial verb construction 106 where only the last verb is inflected. Therefore meenin is interpreted as the last verb of a serial verb construction with meen being a kind of verb of negation meaning ‘not to be’ or ‘not to happen now’ as in:
kp8 ⲕⲁⲗⲗⲉ̄ ⲉⲛⲛⲁ ⲓ̄ ⲙⲉ̄ⲛⲉⲗⲅⲓ ⲁ̄ ⲃⲉ̄ⲣⲕⲓⲇⲙ粩ⲛ粩. kallee enna ii meenelgi aa beerkidmunu.
kallee enna ii meen-el=gi droppings 2sg.poss hand be.not-pcpt.pst=acc aag beer-kiddi-munu dur be.satisfied-caus-neg.3sg “He is not satisfied by the droppings of your hand.”
Inflection of tense-aspect is left to the verb in the second clause. I conclude that in constructions with goon ▶▶ goon is a subordinator with the first clause subordinated to the second main clause; ▶▶ goon is always placed at the end of the subordinate clause (i.e. postpositive), following its verb.
In the proverbs ‑in and -n before goon represent 2/3sg or 3pl. In spoken Dongolawi and even more in Kenzi the final personal suffix consonant n is dropped clause-finally, however pronounced before goon. Therefore a possible interpretation of ‑in and -n would be as genitive marker, especially as other Dongolawi subordinators as bokkon and illar are preceded by the genitive clitic =n. There are two reasons against that interpretation: ▶▶ Dongolawi and Kenzi roots ending in a consonant and followed by a genitive marker are frequently contracted which is not ob- served before goon. ▶▶ The Kenzi genitive clitic before a following consonant is =na. However in both, Dongolawi and Kenzi, there is only n before goon, *na is not possible.
82 El-Shafie El-Guzuuli, p.c. 83 Massenbach, Wörterbuch des nubischen Kunuzi-Dialektes, p. 136 §21C7, writes it as mênkin·gon. However I have never heard the k sound. Abdel-Hafiz does not discuss it at all. On the strength of Old Nubian data like ir ‘to give birth’ and mir ‘to be infertile’ meen could be analyzed as a negation prefix m plus the verb en ‘to be.’ Coordination with goon and Bisyndetic =gon
Regarding Fadidja Abdel-Hafiz offers an alternative explanation which could also be applied to Kenzi:
In Fadicca subordination, the clitic (-n) introducing the subordinate clause is attached to the verb at the end of the clause. The clitic is often preceded or followed by clause markers.84 107
However, in order to standardize Kenzi with Dongolawi where the verb final ‑n is uttered more frequently I do not follow Abdel-Hafiz’s interpretation. In a non-literal translation the literal adversative rendering of Kenzi meenin goon as ‘although … not’ is rendered as temporal se- quential / consecutive ‘before’ or sometimes as ‘without’ as my Kenzi co-investigators did, i.e.:
“Before he buys a camel, he bought a bridle.” / kp5 “Without buying a camel, he bought a bridle.”
“Before he rides the donkey, he shakes the legs.” kp6
“Before they buy a cow, they search for the rope.” kp7
The Kenzi co-investigators prefer the temporal sequential render- ing to the adversative one when translating a proverb into Arabic. However, in sentence ms:k2 which has the same order ‘although … not’ cannot be replaced by ‘before’ as that would change the mean- ing. The Kenzi construction meenin goon comes closest to Dongolawi goon with preceding negation suffix ‑men85 as in dp5. However, in rendering it behaves like ms:k2 with rendering ‑men goon as ‘be- fore’ being excluded.86 goon is rendered temporally in the following proverbs87:
3.4 Affirmative–affirmative propositional order with same subject
粩ⲥⲕⲓⲇ ⲟⲅⲓⲣⲣⲟ ⲁ̄ ⲧⲁ̄, ⲧ粩ⲅ粩ⲣⲅⲓⲣⲓⲛ ⲅⲟ̄ⲛ, ⲁ̄ ⲛⲟⲅⲓ. kp9 uskid ogirro aa taa, tugurgirin goon, aa nogi.
84 Abdel-Hafiz, “Coordinate Constructions in Fadicca and English,” p. 22. If one changes the analysis of the last of the four example sentences (i.e. 56d) where -n as subordinator follows the noun instead of the verb that theory makes sense. It would be possible to make -n follow the verb, too. 85 See Armbruster, Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar, §5743. 86 El-Shafie El-Guzuuli, p.c. 87 For a discussion in Kenzi grammars see Massenbach, Wörterbuch des nubischen Kunuzi- Dialektes, p. 169, and Abdel-Hafiz, A Reference Grammar of Kunuz Nubian, p. 267. Jaeger
uskid ogir=ro aag taar-Ø birth lap=loc dur come-3sg tugur=gir-in goon aag nog-i shroud=all2-cop.3sg sub dur go-3sg “The birth comes in the [mother’s] lap, while he is in a shroud, he 108 goes.”
3.5 Affirmative–affirmative propositional order with different subject
kp10 ⲧⲟ̅ⲩ̅ⲃⲁⲣ ⲉⲛ ⲅⲟ̄ⲛ, ⲧⲟ̅ⲩ̅ⲃⲟⲥⲣ粩. tuubar en goon, tuubosru.
tuub-ar e-n goon tuub-os-r-u wade-nr be-3sg sub wade-def-neut-1/2pl “While it is the ‘wading’ / tuubar season, you (pl.) wade indeed.”
kp11 jugrin goon, farte! “While it is hot, take [it] out!”
ms:k488 ⲃ粩ⲣⲱⲓ ⲁ̄ⲅⲣⲁⲛ ⲅⲟ̄ⲛ, ⲁ̄ⲅ ⲧⲟ̄ⳝ粩ⲛ. burwi āgrangon, atōjun.
buru-i aag-r-an goon aag too-ij-un girl-pl sit-neut-3pl sub dur enter-int-3sg “While the girls are sitting, he enters (completely).”
kp12 consists of a conditional imperative with four coordinands where the first proposition has affirmative-affirmative, the second one affirmative-negative propositional order while the subject re- mains unchanged:
kp11 ⲁ̄ⲅⲓⲛ ⲅⲟ ⲱⲓⲣⲓⳝⲕⲓⲛ, ⲧⲉ̄ⲃⲓⲛ ⲅⲟ̄ⲛ ⲱⲓⲣⲓⳝⲙⲓⲛ粩! aagin goon wirijkin, teebin goon wirijminu!
aag-in goon wirij-ki-n stay-2sg sub naked-cond-2sg teeb-in goon wirij-minu stop-2sg sub naked-neg.imp “If while sitting you are naked, while standing do not be naked!”
I interpret both goon as non-adversative temporal simultaneous.
88 Massenbach, Nubische Texte im Dialekt der Kunūzi und der Dongolawi, p. 31. In the current orthography the second word is aagran goon. Coordination with goon and Bisyndetic =gon
Dongolawi proverbs with goon and non-adversative function have not been attested that far. That goes along that goon as temporal marker is missing in Armbruster. However there is one Dongolawi sentence from a narrative text with negative-affirmative proposi tional order with same subject: 109 ⲁⲙⲃⲁ̄ⲃ ⲃⲉⲇⲣⲓⲣ ⲉⲗⲅⲟⲛ ⲉ̄ⲛⲅⲓ ⲉⲇⲙⲉⲛ ⲅⲟⲟⲛ ⲛ粩ⲅⲇⲓⲅⲓ ⲁ̄ⲅ ⲧⲁ̄ⳝⲉⲣⲉⲉ̄ⲕⲟⲛ. ms:d189 ambāb bédrir elgon ēngi edmengon nugdigi atājerēkōn. ambaab bedrir elgon 1sg.poss.father early not.yet een=gi ed-men wife=acc marry-neg goon nugd-i=gi aag taajere-ko-n sub slave-pl=acc dur trade-prt1-3sg “My father, earlier, while he had not yet married the woman, he traded with slaves.”
In conclusion, goon marks concessive and temporal coordination however it is not always necessary. In Kenzi proverbs goon occurs much more frequently (12 times) than in Dongolawi ones (3 times only). In Kenzi proverbs concessive and temporal coordination is nearly always expressed by goon, in Dongolawi it is mixed. The difference cannot depend on the kind of co-investigator as both in Dongolawi and in Kenzi I worked with a broad variety of different speakers. Could it be that either Kenzi is more explicit or that there are cases where Kenzi employs and Dongolawi does not employ goon? A final note regarding orthography: While goon cannot be sepa- rated from the preceding verb and in uttering is always connected to the verb-final consonant n I interpret goon as an orthographic word as readability after a verb and its verbal suffixes without word boundary would become difficult.
4. Clauses coordinated with bisyndetic =gon
The clitic =gon and its allomorphs =kon and =ton also cover adversa- tive and non-adversative functions. Like goon Armbruster consid- ers =gon as a complex morpheme composed of the object marker =gi plus the suffix -on.90 I write =gon and its variants with short vowel, both in Dongolawi and in Kenzi. While Massenbach writes it with a long vowel: gôn,
89 Ibid., p. 100. In the current orthography the fifth word is edmen goon. 90 Armbruster, Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar, §§ 4389, 4398, and Armbruster, Dongolese Nubian: A Lexicon, p. 161. Jaeger
kôn, similar as Ahmed Sokarno Abdel-Hafiz,91 I hear the short vowel in Kenzi, too. =gon can be monosyndetic and bisyndetic. Bisyndetic =gon occurs on phrase (i.e. connected to two conjoined phrases) and clause level (i.e. connected to conjoined clauses). The typical use of bisyndetic 110 =gon on phrase level is shown in the following proverb:
dp13 ⲧⲟⲣⲃⲁⲗ ⲕ粩ⲃⲛ ⲅⲁ̄ⲣⲅⲟⲛ ⲧⲁⲃⲓⲇ ⲧⲟ̅ⲩ̅ⲣⲕⲟⲛ ⲙⲉⲛⲓⲗⲗⲟ ⲛⲉ̄ⲱⲉⲙ粩ⲛ粩.
torbal kubn gaargon tabid tuurkon menillo neewemunu.
torbal kub=n gaar=gon farmer boat=gen side=conj tabid tuur=gon menillo neewe-munun smith inside=conj except rest-neg.3sg “The farmer does not rest except [at] the side of the boat and inside [the house of] the smith.”
=gon joins similar noun phrases (in this case the two locations where a farmer finds rest) within a clause together. As =gon is attached to phrases and not to words I interpret it as a clitic. In the following I look at bisyndetic =gon connecting clauses, not phrases. Bisyndetic =gon on clause level is missing in Armbruster’s, Massenbach’s and Ahmed Sokarno Abdel-Hafiz’s grammars.
4.1 Affirmative–affirmative propositional order with different subject
dp14 粩ⲥⲕⲉⲗⲛⲇⲓⲅⲟⲛ ⲧⲟ̄ⲇⲓⲣ ⲅⲁ̄ⲣⲓⲛ, ⲧⲟ̄ⲛⲇⲓⲅⲟⲛ ⲃⲉⲣⲣⲟ ⲅⲁ̄ⲣⲓⲛ. uskelndigon toodir gaarin, toondigon berro gaarin.
uski-el-ndi=gon tood=ir give.birth-pcpt.pst-poss=coord child=loc gaar-in embrace-3sg tood-ndi=gon ber=ro gaar-in child-poss=coord wood=loc embrace-3sg “While the one who gave birth embraces the child, he [the child] embraces the wood belonging to the child.”
dp15 deski tabbelgon densir anin, katregi tabbelgon katre anin. “While the one who touched the fat, becomes full of goodness; the one who touched the wall, he becomes a wall.”
91 Massenbach, Wörterbuch des nubischen Kunuzi-Dialektes, p. 169, and Abdel-Hafiz, A Reference Grammar of Kunuz Nubian, p. 265. The latter uses a slightly different notation: go:n, ko:n. Coordination with goon and Bisyndetic =gon
jagadti, kashi weerkon inded widin, intille weerkon kiddigirin. dp16 “The weak [person], while one stalk swims and carries [him], one needle makes [him] drown.”
ⲙⲉ̄ⲱⲅⲟⲛ ⲁ̄ 粩ⲥⲕⲓ, ⲧⲉⲕⲕⲟⲛ ⲁ̄ ⲧⲁ̄ⳝⲓ. kp14 meewgon aa uski, tekkon aa taaji. 111
meew=gon aag uski-Ø pregnant=coord dur give.birth-3sg ter=gon aag taaj-i 3sg.subj=coord dur cry-3sg “While the pregnant woman gives birth, he [her husband] cries.”
ingon bahti kinyima, weeri bahtigon kulugi aa toog. kp15 “While this one is without good luck, others [who have] good luck break the stone.”
ⲧⲟ̄ⲇ ⲇⲟ̅ⲩ̅ⲗⲅⲟⲛ ⲙⲟϩⲁⲙⲙⲉⲇ ϣⲁ̄ⲧⲓⲣ ⲉⲗ ⲉⲙⲓ̄ⲛ, ⲕⲓⲛⲛⲁⲅⲟⲛ Mⲟϩⲁⲙⲙⲉⲇ ms:k692 ϣⲁ̄ⲧⲓⲣ ⲉⲧ ⲧ̄ⲁⲓ̈ⲓ̈ⲓⲃ. Tōd dūlgon Mohammed Shātir el Emīn, kinnagon Mohammed Shātir et Tayyib.
tood duul=gon […] kinna=gon son big=coord small=coord “The older son (was named) Mohammed Shātir el Emīn, and the younger one Mohammed Shātir et Tayyib.”
In the above proverbs and the narrative sentence =gon is exclusively attached to an explicit subject noun / noun phrase with animate ref- erent. The two events occur simultaneously. Both =gon are rendered by a single English word, ‘while.’93 Frequently in the above proverbs the contrastive function is real- ized through antithetical lexical items which are typical for prov- erbs. In dp14 (‘parent’ – ‘child’) the antithetical lexical items are ex- plicit, in kp14 (‘pregnant woman’ – ‘non-pregnant relative’) implicit. There is one Kenzi sentence where as the subject is implicit both =gon are attached to the object with the object showing no accusa- tive marker as Massenbach observes: “Sehr oft fehlt es (gi) hinter gôn.”94
92 Massenbach, Nubische Texte im Dialekt der Kunūzi und der Dongolawi, p. 61. 93 Of course, ‘while’ is also a temporal clause marker. However, here =gon is used adversatively. A similar case from Upper Kuskokwim Athabaskan is discussed in Kibrik, “Coordination in Upper Kuskokwim Athabaskan,” p. 550. 94 Massenbach, Wörterbuch des nubischen Kunuzi-Dialektes, p. 116. Translated: ‘Most times gi after gon is missing.’ Jaeger
4.2 Affirmative–negative propositional order with same subject
ms:k695 ⲍⲟ̄ⲗⲓ ⲙⲁⲗⲗⲉⲅⲟⲛ ⲟ̅ⲩ̅ⲱⲉⲇ ⲧⲁ̄ⲥ粩ⲙ, ϣⲓⲃⲓⲗⲗⲉⲅⲟⲛ ⲟ̅ⲩ̅ⲱⲉⲕⲟ̄ⲙⲛ粩ⲛ. Zōli mallegon ūwedtāsum, shibillegon ūwekōmnun.
112 zooli malle=gon uuwe-ed taa-s-um people all=coord call-cpl come-prt2-3sg shibille=gon uuwe-koo-mnun kite=coord call-prt1-neg.3sg “He invited everybody, (only) the kite he did not invite.”
In all the above proverbs and narrative sentences bisyndetic =gon expresses the contrastive (except narrative sentence ms:k1 where it is restrictive). There is one Dongolawi proverb where the two claus- es connected by bisyndetic =gon are additive:
dp17 ⲁⲣⲅⲟⲛ ⲃⲓ ⲁⲇⲉⲙ ⲁⲛⲇ粩, ⲱⲉⲗⲗⲓⲅⲟⲛ ⲁⲅⲣⲓ ⲃⲓ ⲟ̅ⲩ̅ⲕⲕⲓⲣⲁⲛ. argon bi adem andu, welligon argi bi uukiran.
ar=gon bi adem an-d-u 1pl=coord fut man become-neut-1pl wel-li=gon ar=gi bi uukki-r-an dog-pl=coord 1pl=acc fut bark-neut-3pl “We will become a [rich, important] man, and the dogs will bark at us.”
That indicates that like goon bisyndetic =gon only in specific con- texts gains a contrastive meaning. Both markers are not adversa- tive markers by themselves. However it also demonstrates that in contrast to goon, =gon is a coordinator: While the subordinate clause with goon does not carry tense and aspect, both clauses are inflected in bisyndetic =gon constructions.
5. Juxtaposed clauses
As proverbs aim to be short and precise, economical and dramat- ic, proverbs with asyndetic coordination are presumed. I begin by looking at juxtaposed clauses which have adversative character similar to coordinated clauses with goon, e.g. they present a conces- sive, yet without a marker. For the purpose of rendering denial-of- expectation I add ‘but’:
95 Massenbach, Nubische Texte im Dialekt der Kunūzi und der Dongolawi, p. 22. When El-Shafie El-Guzuuli, p.c., rendered ms:k1 in Dongolawi it was unmarked. Coordination with goon and Bisyndetic =gon
5.1 Affirmative–affirmative propositional order with different subject
ⲕⲁ̄ ⲧⲉⲛⲇⲓ ⲱⲁⳡⳡⲓⲛ, ⲓⲣⲓⲛⲇⲓⲅⲓ ⲛⲟ̅ⲩ̅ⲣⲕⲓⲣⲓN. dp18 kaa tendi wanynyin, irindigi nuurkirin.
kaa tendi wanynyi-n 113 house 3sg.poss be.without.roof-3sg iri-ndi=gi nuur-kir-in people-poss=acc roof-caus-3sg “His house is without a roof, [but] he roofs the [other] people’s [houses].”
ⳝⲟ̄ⲅⲉⲗ ⲁ̄ⲅⲓⲛ, ⲇ粩ⲕⲕⲉⲗⲅⲓ ⲉⲇⲕⲟⲣⲁⲛ. dp19 joogel aagin, dukkelgi edkoran.
joog-el aag-in grind-pcpt.pst stay-3sg dukki-el=gi ed-ko-r-an bake-pcpt.pst=acc marry-prt196-neut-3pl “She who ground [the flour], stays [unmarried]; [but] they married the one who baked [the bread from the flour].”
Note that in dp19 even without concessive goon only the second clause carries the tense marker.
5.2 Affirmative–negative propositional order with same subject
ⲧⲉⲛⲛ ⲕⲁⳝ ⲃⲟ̄ⲇⲓⲛ, ⲅ粩ⲧⲁ̄ⲣⲕⲓ ⲇ粩ⲕⲕⲓⲙ粩ⲛ. dp20 tenn kaj boodin, gutaarki dukkimun.
tenn kaj bood-in 3sg.poss horse run-3sg gutaar=gi dukki-mun sand.storm=acc extract-neg “His horse runs, [but] it does not make a sand storm.”
fooja kalin, kuru anmun. dp21 “The sparrow eats [a lot], [but] it does not become a turtle dove.”
96 I gloss -ko and -r as separate morphemes, cf. Armbruster, Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar, §2975ff: “The stem of the perfect is formed by adding -ko- to the simple stem. I realize that alternatively both morphemes could be glossed as one suffix. As this paper deals with the adversative I leave the decision regarding glossing of tense-aspect markers to further research.” Jaeger
dp22 tekki shegin, geewgi ettamun. “He pierces him, [but] he does not bring the blood.”
In each proverb with affirmative-affirmative propositional order the two subjects change, in each proverb with affirmative-negative 114 order the two subjects remain. While with all proverbs with affir- mative-affirmative propositional order goon cannot be added, with all proverbs with affirmative-negative propositional order from a purely grammatical point of view goon is optional and could be added at the end of the first clause without changing its meaning.97 No juxtaposed Kenzi proverb with concessive function has been found thus far. Alternatively I present one Kenzi sentence with con- cessive function from a narrative text:
ms:k398 ⲁⲛⲛⲁ ⲓⲇ ⲁⲇⲉⲙ ⲁⲛⲟⲥⲥ粩ⲙ, ⲁ̄ⲅ ⲃⲁⳡⲛⲙ粩ⲛ粩ⲛ. anna id adem anossum, aa banymunum.
anna id adem an-os-s-um 1sg.poss husband man become-def-prt2-3sg aag bany-munum dur speak-neg.3sg “My husband became a human being, [but] he does not speak.”
That example indicates that creating the concessive function in Kenzi without goon is possible. Next I look at juxtaposed clauses which are similar to the coor- dinated clauses with bisyndetic =gon as discussed in the preceding section, e.g. they present a contrastive. There is only one example from Dongolawi. For the purpose of rendering I add ‘but.’
5.3 Affirmative–negative propositional order with different subject
dp23 ⲱⲓϭϭⲓ̄ⲣⲛ ⲓ̄ⲣ ⲇⲁⲃⲓⲛ, ⲃⲁⳡⳡⲓⲇⲛ ⲓ̄ⲣ ⲇⲁⲃⲙ粩ⲛ粩. wicciirn iir dabin, banynyidn iir dabmunu.
wicciir=n iir dab-in stick=gen mark disappear-3sg banynyid=n iir dab-munun talking=gen mark disappear-neg.3sg
97 El-Shafie El-Guzuuli, p.c. However proverbs do not do it as thereby they would become less economical. 98 Massenbach, Nubische Texte im Dialekt der Kunūzi und der Dongolawi, p. 30. There is a similar construction on p. 46: Zōlanossu abainmunu. (‘Although he became a human being, he did not speak.’) Coordination with goon and Bisyndetic =gon
“The mark of the stick disappears, [but] the mark of talking does not disappear.”
Besides concessive, goon expresses temporal simultaneity as shown above. For the purpose of rendering juxtaposed proverbial clauses having non-adversative temporal simultaneity I add tempo- 115 ral ‘while’:
Affirmative–affirmative propositional order with different subject
saale dessen togoor aagiru, tenn baram addo tub toon. dp24
saale desse=n togoor aag-r-u sant.acacia green=gen under stay-neut-1pl tenn baram ar=do tub 3sg.poss blossoming 1.pl=loc sweep toor-n enter-3sg “[While] We stay under the green acacia tree, its blossoming sweeps and enters [falls] on us.”
Note that Kenzi proverb kp10 and narrative sentence ms:k4 which have the same order do not omit goon.
Negative–negative propositional order with same subject Both Dongolawi and Kenzi have one proverb where both verbs in both main clauses are negated; additionally the Kenzi proverb has both verbs in both clauses in the past tense. In order to express the additive function ‘neither’ instead of ‘not’ is used in the rendering:
ⲕⲁⲗⲧⲓⲅⲓ ⲕⲁⲗⲙ粩ⲛ, ⲉⲥⲥⲓⲅⲓ ⲛⲓ̄ⲙ粩ⲛ. dp25 kaltigi kalmun, essigi niimun.
kalti=gi kal-mun essi=gi nii-mun food=acc eat-neg water=acc drink-neg “He does not eat the food, neither does he drink the water.”
ⲙⲓⲥⲥⲓ ⲛⲁⲗⲕⲟ̄ⲙⲛ粩, 粩ⲗ粩ⲅ ⲅⲓⳝⲓⲣⲕⲟ̄ⲙⲛⲟ. kp25 missi nalkoomnu, ulug gijirkoomnu.
missi nal-koo-munu ulug eye see-prt1-neg.3sg ear gijir-koo-munu hear-prt1-neg.3sg Jaeger
“The eye did not see, neither did the ear hear.”
Note that in kp25 both clauses carry the preterite tense. This corre- sponds with bisyndetic =gon constructions and is different to dp19.
116 6. Summary
The example sentences of the last three sections are gathered and presented in tables in order to support analysis:
Concessive
1st prop. 2nd prop. subj. realized by source aff aff same goon dp1 goon kp1 aff aff different X99 dp18 aff neg same X but goon possible dp20 X ms:k3 aff neg different X but goon possible ds4 goon kp4 neg aff same goon dp5100
Contrastive
1st prop. 2nd prop. subj. realized by source aff aff different =gon =gon dp14 =gon =gon kp14, ms:k6 aff neg different X dp23
Non-adversative temporal simultaneity
1st prop. 2nd prop. subj. realized by source aff aff same goon kp9 aff aff different X dp24 goon kp10, ms:k4 neg aff same goon ms:d1 neg neg same X dp25, kp25
99 X means that propositions are juxtaposed. A missing marker is confirmed by dp26.11 and two further proverbs not listed; i.e. four proverbs altogether. 100 In this row I do not list the Kenzi proverbs with same order and meenin goon, as co- investigators tended to render it temporally. Coordination with goon and Bisyndetic =gon
Non-adversative additive
1st prop. 2nd prop. subj. realized by source aff aff different =gon =gon dp17
Note that in contrast to the collection of Dongolawi proverbs, in 117 Massenbach’s Dongolawi narrative texts goon and bisyndetic =gon realising adversative aspects have not been discovered,101 the same as in Dongolawi narrative texts I collected myself. Kenzi concessive goon has also not been discovered in Kenzi narrative texts. Either the adversative is much less used in narrative texts or the behaviour of goon and bisyndetic =gon correspond the Kalinga marker yakon ‘but’ which “is not used in hortatory texts” and “in narratives [except] when the countering proposition is important or relevant to what follows.”102 The concessive function is usually marked by postpositional goon after the first clause. In a few propositional orders there is no marker. The contrastive function is marked by bisyndetic =gon when the propositions are affirmative–affirmative, otherwise it stays un- marked. The non-adversative temporal simultaneity (‘while’) is marked in a similar way as the concessive (as far as data are available). In Don- golawi the affirmative–affirmative proposition with different sub- ject is not marked in both, concessive and temporal simultaneity. There is one difference: In juxtaposed clauses the preterite tense- aspect marker occurs in both clauses in opposition to the concessive clauses. The affinity between the concessive function and temporal simultaneity is interpreted as goon putting the emphasis more on si- multaneity which is also present in proverbs with concessive func- tion, than on adversativity. The non-adversative additive (‘and’) is marked in a similar way as the contrastive (as far as data are available). As in Dongolawi and Kenzi, in Russian contrast and additive have the same marker. goon and bisyndetic =gon are not the only markers used in ‘but’ coordination in Dongolawi and Kenzi. Further markers are bor- rowed from Arabic. I leave a discussion of non-indigenous adver- sative markers and adversativity on discourse level for a further paper.
101 Gertrud von Massenbach did not get the opportunity to visit the Dongola area herself, she worked with Dongolawi living in the Kenzi area. Therefore Kenzi may have had some influence. However I checked the data with El-Shafie El-Guzuuli. 102 Levinsohn, Self-Instruction Materials on Non-Narrative Discourse Analysis, p. 30. Jaeger
Bibliography
Abdel-Hafiz. Ahmed Sokarno. A Reference Grammar of Kunuz Nu- bian. PhD Thesis, State University of New York, Buffalo ny, 1988. ———. “Nubian Relative Clauses.” Journal of the Arts Faculty. Assiut 118 University, 1989. ———. “Coordinate Constructions in Fadicca and English.” Languag- es in Contrast 10.1 (2010): pp. 1–28. Armbruster, Charles Hubert. Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar. Cam- bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1960. ——— . Dongolese Nubian: A Lexicon: Nubian–English, English–Nubian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965. Bechhaus-Gerst, Marianne. Sprachwandel durch Sprachkontakt am Beispiel des Nubischen im Niltal: Möglichkeiten und Grenzen einer diachronen Soziolinguistik. With an English summary. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 1996. Bender, M. Lionel. “Nilo-Saharan.” In African Languages: An Intro- duction, edited by Bernd Heine & Derek Nurse. Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press, 2000. Blakemore, Diane. Relevance and Linguistic Meaning: The Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 2002. Crystal, David. A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. 5th edition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 2003. El-Guzuuli, El-Shafie & Marcus Jaeger. “Aspects of Dongolawi Roots and Affixes: Related to Orthography.” In Unity and Diversity of Nubian Languages: Toward a Standardized Writing System of Nu- bian Languages, edited by Muhammad J. Hashim & Abdel Rahim Hamid Mugaddam. Cape Town: casas, 2012. Finnegan, Ruth. Oral Literature in Africa. Nairobi: Oxford Univer- sity Press, 1970. Hāmid Khabīr AlShaich. Nubian Wisdom and Proverbs from Dongola. ,Khartoum: Nader حكم و امثال .نوبية من دنقال: جمعية دنقال للثقافة و الرتاث النويب 2007. Haspelmath, Martin. E., ed. Coordinating Constructions. Amster dam: John Benjamins Publisher, 2004. ———. “Coordination.” In Language Typology and Syntactic Descrip- tion, vol. ii: Complex Constructions, edited by Timothy Shopen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Herzog, Rolf. Die Nubier: Untersuchungen und Betrachtungen zur Gruppengliederung, Gesellschaftsform und Wirtschaftsweise. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1957. Horn, Laurence Robert. A Natural History of Negation. Chicago: Uni- versity of Chicago Press, 1989. Coordination with goon and Bisyndetic =gon
Jaeger, Marcus & Kamal Hissein. “Aspects of Kenzi-Dongolawi Phonology Related to Orthography.” In Unity and Diversity of Nu- bian Languages: Toward a Standardized Writing System of Nubian Languages, edited by Muhammad J. Hashim and Abdel Rahim Hamid Mugaddam. Cape Town: casas, 2012. Kibrik, Andrej A. “Coordination in Upper Kuskokwim Athabaskan.” 119 In Coordinating Constructions, edited by Martin Haspelmath. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publisher, 2004. König, Ekkehard. “Concessive Connectives and Concessive Sentenc- es.” In Explaining Language Universals, edited by John Hawkins. Oxford: Blackwell, 1988. Levinsohn, Stephen H. Self-Instruction Materials on Narrative Discourse Analysis. sil International, 2012.
Rilly, Claude. “The Linguistic Position of Meroitic.” arkamani Sudan Electronic Journal of Archaeology and Anthropology, 2004.